PR-CY MCP

generate_image

Сгенерировать изображениe по описанию с помощью ИИ.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "generate_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`model`	No	Модель ИИ	auto
`prompt`	Yes	Описание изображения
`aspect_ratio`	No	Соотношение сторон изображения	1:1
`reference_images`	No	Список урлов референсных изображений: до 5, у flux-3 до 10. Доступно только на платном тарифе и только для моделей auto, gpt-image-2.5-flare, nano-banana-2.1, nano-banana-2, nano-banana-2-lite, nano-banana-pro, seedream/v4.5, flux-3

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`task_id`	Yes	Идентификатор задачи, по которому открывается её страница
`image_url`	Yes	URL сгенерированного изображения
`error_code`	No	Код ошибки, если генерация вернула его вместе с результатом

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no mention of cost/quota consumption, latency, whether generation is synchronous, or the paid-tariff gate on reference images. The only such constraint lives in the schema, not the description.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single short sentence with no wasted clauses, and the core action is front-loaded. It is efficient but so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than optimal brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the schema fully covers parameters. However, with zero annotations on a paid, potentially slow generation tool, the description should at least flag cost or the paid-tariff requirement for reference images; that gap leaves it only minimally adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the parameters are well documented in-schema (including the model enum, aspect ratio enum, and the reference-image limit and tariff restriction), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description itself adds nothing about any of the four parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Сгенерировать изображение') and adds the source of input ('по описанию'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool produces. It gives no sibling differentiation, but none is needed since no other sibling generates images, so 4 rather than 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist. Nothing warns that generation may cost credits, require a paid tariff, or take time, which matters for an agent deciding whether to invoke it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All PR-CY MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?